Otatara

This old time pa is situated on a hill on the left bank of the Tutae-kuri river at Redcliff, Napier district. The site comprises several spurs, where the end of a ridge abutting on the river breaks down into several short and somewhat steep spurs. For half a mile along the southern and eastern slope, extending to the summit of the ridge, are seen innumerable small terracings betokening former occupation, for all these little terraces were the sites of either dwelling huts or storage places. The latter are all of the semi-subterranean type known as rua tahuhu, rectangular oblong pits over which a A shaped roof was built. No sign was seen of any rua kopiha or well-like wholly subterranean storage places. Of the rectangular pits a great number are seen, varying in size, the largest noted was 30 ft. long. See Fig. 75, p. 297.

Opposite the Redcliff bridge is what was probably the principal entrance to the pa, situated on a secondary or interior spur of easy grade and a broad face, flanked on either side by high, narrow topped and prominent spurs presenting steep faces. Across the face of the gently sloping intermediate spur runs a defensive earthwork, which extends up the spur to the south. About the middle of it is an opening that probably represents the old entrance. The earthwork wall is a light one and would look absurdly so by the side of the great ramparts of such a pa as Manu-korihi. A short line of similar light earthwork was noted on the top of the spur west of the above, and these are the only defensive earthworks seen at Otatara. There is no sign of any system of circumvallation, of outer or inner ramparts, trenches or scarps. It is therefore clear that, if Otatara was a fortified position, its defences must have consisted of stockading. The soil is an easily worked one and, at Taranaki, the Bay of Plenty, and many other places, such a place would have been scarped, trenched and walled into a very strong position.

The Otatara pa or settlement covered in all about 90 or 100 acres, and over this area are innumerable small irregular terracings of the hill slopes, on which the huts of the inhabitants were situated, as also their pits for the preservation of their kumara (sweet potatoes) and other food supplies. No terraces of any considerable length or width are seen here. This feature, as also that of the lack of earthwork page 296defences, is also seen in the Heipipi pa at Petane, and forms an interesting item for comparison. In the great pa areas of Taranaki and the Bay of Plenty this type may be looked for in vain. Small specimens may be noted in the Wellington district, where, however, the formation does not lend itself to the construction of earthworks or the excavation of fosses.

The southern slopes of Otatara show these signs of close occupation for about half a mile, and the place must have had a large population when inhabited. The multitudinous linchets hewn out of the slopes would accommodate thousands of people. The vast number of such dwelling places, together with the many store pits tend to prove that the folk who occupied Otatara must have been diligent cultivators, and that their principal food supply consisted of the kumara. The rich flats of alluvium lying at the base of the hills provided them with the very best grounds for cultivation purposes. On all three of the radiating spurs are seen pits where such supplies were stored, many of which pits would accommodate a very large quantity of food products.

With regard to the water supply of Otatara, it is clear that water was obtainable at several places in the gullies within the occupied area.

The finest and best preserved residential sites and store pits are seen on the spur near Mr. Donnelly's residence. Here, as elsewhere, it is seen that the upper parts of the ridge were closely occupied, so numerous are the linchets, while the lower slopes, though often presenting a much easier gradient, show few such tokens of occupation, or absolutely none at all.

When inhabited there was probably a stockade enclosing the whole occupied area, as also lighter palisadings round each little residential site.

Owing to the lack of earthwork defences and large terraces, Otatara does not lend itself to illustration by means of photography, plan, or cross sections.

It is possible that such a numerous people as the residents of this place must have been was in no great danger of being attacked, or that it was inhabited in comparatively peaceful times. Again there is some evidence to show that these old time tribes and correlative clans of the eastern side of the North Island were not such constant fort-dwellers as those of many other districts. Cook found the natives of some places on the east coast dwelling in unfortified villages.

About half a mile west of Otatara is a small pa situated on a spur that shows signs of earthwork defences. It is situated near the river, but was not examined. A further exploration of the old fortified page 297places of this district would be of interest in order to show how far the singular type of pa represented by Otatara extended.

There is at present a small native community living at Wai-o-hiki, on the right bank of the river near the bridge at Redcliff, just east of Otatara.

Otatara is said to be a very old pa and to have been originally occupied by the clans known as the Tini o Awa and Te Whatu-mamoa.

The Heipipi and Otatara pa show innumerable small terrace formations to accommodate one or two huts each, seldom more. These diminutive terraces in no way lent themselves to defence, as did the big terraces of northern forts. The latter comprise quite a different type of terraced pa, as will be seen when we come to describe them. One would imagine that the inhabitants of the above two places were but little troubled by enemies, so neglectful were they of earthwork defences.

It seems improbable that Otatara was the same as Nga Whaka-tatara, the place mentioned in the following tradition:—

The Puketapu pa, near Omahu, Hastings district, had two tihi (summits). It was occupied by some Kahungunu folk at the time when the clan Ngati-Ira, fleeing from the wrath to come, or rather page 298the wrath that had come, marched southward from the East Cape district in search of a new home. These two clans fought at Nga Whakatatara, from which field the local folk retired to Marae-kakaho, pursued by the invaders. When below Puketapu, one Manuhiri, a chief of that place, called out to Koura, leader of the Kahungunu party, then fighting:—"Koura, E! Unuhia! E kore e taea, he uru ngaherehere." (O Koura! Withdraw! It cannot be done; they are as trees in the forest). Koura, who had received many wounds called up in reply:— "E ta! Nawai te koura ka kai ki roto ki tapui e kore e taea te whakaunu; ina ia koe e kai kanohi mai." (When the koura (crayfish) has eaten the bait in the lobster pot he cannot withdraw, since you merely look on.) Here the doomed fighter, with the reckless humour of the Maori, punned on his own name ere he trod the broad way of Tane that leads to the spirit world.

The following is the tradition concerning Nga Whakatatara, as preserved by Wai-rarapa natives:—

In an account of the migration of Ngati-Ira from the East Coast to Wai-rarapa, given by an old native many years ago, occurs some description of the pa Nga Whakatatara, near Pawhakairo. This description cannot be applied to the remains of former occupation now seen at Otatara, and, according to native evidence, the earthworks mentioned have been destroyed, though still in evidence as late as the year 1853.

When Ngati-Ira, under Te Wha-kumu and other chiefs, reached Heretaunga, they settled near Wai-o-hiki and erected Nga Whakatatara as a protection against the Rangitane, Tini o Awa and Ngati-Mahanga tribes then occupying that district. These people resented the intrusion of the Sons of Ira the Heart Eater, and, gathering at the pa known as Te Puketapu, at Omahu, under the chiefs Pae-whenua, Te Kowhaiwhai and Hau-te-ranga, they resolved to attack Nga Whakatatara. Their forces were divided into three parties, one of which advanced to the attack by the channel of the Tutae-kuri river, another advanced along the ridge called Te Tauwhare, while the third halted at Wai-o-hiki to await developments, and also to endeavour to entice Ngati-Ira from their defensive position. According to tradition Ngati-Ira succeeded in defeating all three forces.

The description of the defences of Nga Whakatatara, as preserved orally among Ngati-Ira, is as follows:—

The outermost defensive work was a fosse four fathoms wide and proportionately deep. Then came an earthwork rampart three fathoms in height and half a fathom wide on the top. Inside this, and distant only one fathom from it, was another rampart two fathoms in height and sufficiently wide on top to allow of the page 299defenders standing thereon to repel assaults. It is explained that, should an attacking force succeed in entering the narrow passage between the two ramparts, the members thereof could not use their long spears to advantage, owing to the cramped space, while the defenders on the top of the rampart had every advantage in attacking an enemy standing twelve feet below them.

Inside this second rampart was another, but at what distance is not mentioned. It was of the same dimensions as the second one. The only fosse defence was the outer one already mentioned. The inner area was divided by yet another rampart into two enclosures the inner one being a sanctuary for women and other non-combatants, while the outer one was occupied by fighting men only.

At two corners were situated the two entrances to the pa, termed wahangutuand kuwaha in the narrative, each of which was protected by an overhead platform (puhara), occupied by armed men during an attack. What is apparently an extra defence, or ravelin, extending outward from each gateway in the form of a appears in a native sketch of the defences, but is not explained. In this fort the waharoa or long narrow entrance passage, was represented by the 6 ft. passage between the two ramparts.

Any hostile party forcing an entrance would be compelled to advance along the narrow 6 ft. passage between the two ramparts to the single entrance of the second rampart which entrance was an underground passage below the rampart a form of entrance easily defended. The entrance through the third rampart was also an underground one. This passage gave access to a narrow space, enclosed by a short rampart, from which a third underground passage led to the inner area.

The elevated platforms projected in such a manner that their occupants could observe all faces of the outer defences and detect any attempt to destroy the outer rampart by digging operations.

It will thus be seen that, apart from the unexplained outer defences, any attacking force, in order to take the fort, must force the entrance, run the gauntlet of many energetic defenders along the narrow passage, and force the underground passages, during which progress the defenders would be assailing them from points of vantage for the whole distance.

page 300

This traditionary account is of interest on account of its distinct statement that defenders occupied the tops of the ramparts during an attack:—"Ko nga parepare katoa o roto mai i to waho, kaore he awakari; e rua whanganga te tiketike ake i te papa o te pa nei, e rua a runga, haere tonu ai nga tangata i runga, ara nga toa. Ko nga parepare o waho kotahi te whanganga te matara o tetahi i tetahi. I peratia ai mo te uru te taua ki roto, kaore e tika tona wero i tona tokotoko, huata ranei, i te apiapi o aua parepare, a kei runga ra hoki nga toa i te parepare e haereere ana, e werowero ana i nga tangata e uru ana mai, ina uru ki roto i taua pa." (All the ramparts within the outer one had no accompanying fosse. They were two fathoms in height above the ground level of the pa, and two wide on top, persons, that is warriors, standing right on top. The outer ramparts were one fathom apart. This arrangement was in case a hostile party made entrance; they could not effectually wield their spears on account of the confined space between the ramparts, also the warriors were moving about on top of the ramparts thrusting at persons entering, when such entrance was effected.)

The width given for the outer fosse, viz., four fathoms, is excessive, few of these moats were so wide. The height of the rampart, three fathoms, would include the depth of the moat. The width of two fathoms would, presumably be that of the base of the rampart, not that of its summit. There was no necessity to make a rampart two fathoms wide across the top. A width of 6 ft. would be ample as a position for defenders.

In the district commonly known as the East Coast we find tribes that appear to be descended principally from the old time Toi folk. Among these tribes is one known as Te Wahine-iti, the people of which are partially descended from the crew of a vessel that reached that coast from the isles of Polynesia long centuries ago. The principal person of that vessel was one Hine-rakai, who had been ranging far seas in search of her brother, Tu Te Amokura. He had been swept away from his homeland by a storm and his sister organised an expedition for the purpose of seeking him, in the hope that his vessel had weathered the storm.

Now up to about five hundred years ago these Wahine-iti folk dwelt in the Waiapu valley, and a number of their old hill forts were pointed out to me when I visited that district in 1923. On the hill spurs at Wai-o-Matatini the earthworks of four pa are seen, namely Kopu-te-rehe, Puputa, Papa-hikurangi and Kokere-taniwha. Of these the two latter were strongholds of the Wahine-iti folk during long past generations, and were not occupied by the later coming Ngati-Porou.

page 301

These old positions are of interest to one studying the pa maori (native forts), and here, as in some other places, we note that the oldest fortified places are of simpler plan and construction than most of the more modern places. There is a marked absence of ramparts and fosses, and the defences must have consisted principally of stockades, occasionally supplemented by scarps. They may be compared to the positions at Heipipi and Otatara, described elsewhere, and they lack the continuous, prominent terraces of the North Auckland series. Small linchets are seen that could only have accommodated a single hut. The Kokere-taniwha pa extends up a spur and includes the top of the ridge. Some old pits for food storage seem to show that the kumara was cultivated here in those far off days, but no sign is visible of any rampart or trench, nought save a few much eroded and small escarpments.

The Papa-hikurangi pa occupies a smaller and lower spur near Kokere-taniwha, and does not extend up to the summit of the ridge, hence it was necessary to form a strong barrier at the upper end of the position. See Fig. 76, p. 302. Advantage was taken of a dip or saddle in the spur, and this hollow was excavated so as to form a huge fosse. The upper side of this trench was formed with a long, easy slope so as to give an attacking force no point of vantage, but its down-spur side was carved into a steep, defensive scarp that is even now some sixteen feet in height, this after the erosion of centuries. All other faces of the position must have been defended by stockades. Hut sites and store pits are in evidence, and a small stone implement fashioned from the form of chert known as mata waiapu was found embedded in an eroded face.

The Kopu-te-rehe pa near by is similar to Papa-hikurangi, and the huge trench at its upper end is of about the same depth. A small lateral gully has been scarped on the pa side, while the terraced areas for huts are larger and more pronounced than those of Kokere-taniwha.

No remarkable fortified positions were seen in the Waiapu district, and apparently there were no such extensive and picturesque places such as obtained in the North Auckland region, nor were fosses and ramparts employed as they were in the Taranaki and Bay of Plenty districts.